[Talk-us] NYC DEC Lands reimport

[Kevin Kenny]

As promised, here are the changesets for the first few uploads.

40311281 High Peaks Wilderness
40311404 West Canada Lake Wilderness
40311525 Ferris Lake Wild Forest
40311653 Five Ponds Wilderness
40311828 Black River Wild Forest
40312224 Wilcox Lake Wild Forest

There is a visual change in that the green infill is gone from these
areas in the renderer. It would be a trivial tagging exercise to put
it back: there are six multipolygons that would have to be tagged.
Nevertheless, it still seems to me that any tag resulting in a green
infill would be tagging for the renderer:

natural=wood would be asserting landcover that does not exist: these
areas have varied landcover: temperate deciduous forest, bog and fen,
beaver meadow, boreal coniferous forest, alpine meadow, bare rock,
open water, etc.
landcover=trees is even worse, see above
landuse=forest is also a lie. These areas are NOT managed for forestry
- quite the contrary, there's a constitutional requirement never to
harvest the trees!

I used leisure=nature_reserve and boundary=protected_area
protect_class=1b for these six areas. The appearance therefore
changes. If you want it to change back, convince me that there's a
consensus that landuse=forest would not be tagging for the renderer.

On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 8:15 PM, Kevin Kenny
<kevin.b.kenny+osm at gmail.com> wrote:
> I believe that I have resolutions to all of the issues that I've
> discussed here over the last few weeks. I've done several dry runs of
> selected parcels, and I'm confident that the workflow will not tread
> on the work of human mappers, particularly since I'm inspecting
> everything in JOSM before uploading.
>
> All changes will be done under the distinct user ID ke9tv-nysdec-lands.
>
> I'm going to start the process tonight, doing the largest parcels
> first so as to expose complex issues early. I probably won't get
> through more than a handful this evening, because the largest ones are
> indeed complex and require considerable manual checking and patchwork.
>
> Thanks to everyone for their patience with my questions. Much became
> clearer when I realized that it was once the practice to tag the
> exterior rings of a multipolygon, rather than tagging the relation.
>
> Wish me luck! I'll follow up to this message with a list of
> changesets, so that those who commented can follow along and make sure
> that I followed their advice.